LR Double Negation, PT 35, Sec. 4 #21 Forum

[barrydukakis]

First LR problem in awhile I've gotten wrong and not been able to immediately see an error.

Premise "for any social system, the introduction of labor-saving technology...tend to undermine the values in that social system"

Answer C: Confused because it doesn't matter if the social system is not susceptible to change.... premise says ANY social system can be undermined?

Answer C: Getting rid of the double negation seems to provide the right answer....

Help?

Also, I seem to remember Double Negations being in the LR logic bible, anyone care to point me in the right direction?

[barrydukakis]

Anyone?

[ND'10]

BUMP

[delusional]

First LR problem in awhile I've gotten wrong and not been able to immediately see an error.

Premise "for any social system, the introduction of labor-saving technology...tend to undermine the values in that social system"

Answer C: Confused because it doesn't matter if the social system is not susceptible to change.... premise says ANY social system can be undermined?

Answer C: Getting rid of the double negation seems to provide the right answer....

Help?

Also, I seem to remember Double Negations being in the LR logic bible, anyone care to point me in the right direction?

It seems like process of elimination should work pretty well, although I understand your reservations with the correct answer as well.

I think the explanation is that since any society WOULD change when confronted with labor-saving technology, there must be another reason why this society can't be. The wording is (the society) would not be one in which technology can eliminate economic roles. Why not? Well, if technology would be available to theoretically reduce labor, it WOULD change the social roles. So it's up to you to imagine why this society can't have such technology. Maybe it's against the law, or not wired for electricity. The point is, if technology COULD change roles, society WOULD be open to change. This society ISN'T open to change, ergo, due to whatever circumstance, technology ain't comin'.